Home

  • England have won!

    And won convincingly to take an unassailable 2-0 lead in the series! After losing the toss and being put into bat they put up a formidable 315-6 off their fifty overs. Charlotte Edwards led the way with 138 off 139 balls. She was ably supported by Sarah Taylor who scored 77 off 63 balls and with whom she shared a partnership of 159 (at eight an over). South Africa always had trouble keeping up with the required rate. By the time they reached the halfway point of their innings they were only two wickets down, but the asking rate was almost eight an over and their only hope was to keep wickets in hand. When they lost four wickets in three overs shortly thereafter the match was all over bar the shouting. South Africa failed to bat out their fifty overs; they were bowled out for 219 in the 48th over to give England a 2-0 lead in the series. The wickets were shared around the England bowlers, with Laura Marsh, Danni Hazell, Arran Brindle and Danni Wyatt taking two apiece and Heather Knight taking one. The win secures the series for England, and they will go for the whitewash on Tuesday.

    The England men also ‘played’, insofar as they appeared on a cricket pitch during a scheduled match. The match was very similar to the second one. England batted first and only scored 220. They had a decent start, but once again had a torrid time against spin (Bell still didn’t play) and ended up well short of a competitive target. The bowlers did better this time; Tim Bresnan conceded only forty runs off his ten overs and Steven Finn had another good match, taking 3-45 off his ten. They never had a defensible target, however, and India could get the runs off the other bowlers. India won with ten overs to spare, in a familiar thrashing.

    I only watched part of the men’s match. There are only so many times one can watch such a one sided match (at least when one’s side is on the losing end) and I had only had two and a half hours of sleep anyway. But I’m a bit disappointed that the women’s match was not broadcast anywhere that I could find. Even Cricinfo’s live updates were minimalist. I know that there’s not a lot of demand for it, but England have a very good women’s side (even if they seldom play Test matches) and it would have been quite nice to be able to at least listen to the match live. Two and a half years ago, just after England’s women won the World Cup, (for the third time, making them the single most successful England team in any sport) Claire Taylor wrote an article for the Telegraph about the need for coverage of the women’s game. It’s quite good and all the points are still relevant. There’s another reason why the England women’s side should get media coverage though: They are very good. They play cricket to a very high standard and it is always pleasant to watch good cricket. The broadcasters don’t seem to realise this.

    , , , , ,

  • Congratulations to the All Blacks!

    France 7-8 New Zealand. That’s the scoreline that ends 24 years of hurt for the All Blacks. It was hardly a pretty match, it could probably be inferred from the scoreline that it was very attritional. New Zealand never trailed, but it was a bad handling error that led to France’s try. They had a very fraught last ten minutes in which they had to work hard to stop France and not concede a penalty inside their own half. It would have been a little bit more comfortable, but the All Blacks only got three points from kicks out of eleven attempted. (It was worse for France, who only got two from eleven.) France played well, they fought harder than I or a lot of people expected. New Zealand were the better side though and just about made it count.

    , , ,

  • Rangers of Texas, not Glasgow

    Before the RWC final and England’s almost certainly ill-fated attempt to salvage something against India there is another event. (Tonight is going to be fun.) Game Three of the World Series starts at 19.00 CDT/01.00 BST. The Rangers won Game Two after a bit of inspired idiocy by the Cardinals allowed Texas to score twice in the top of the ninth. Most of the blame for that loss had to go to Tony LaRussa for his increasingly frenetic (and increasingly ill-advised) pitching changes. It came off during the NLCS, but there was an element of fortune to that. It did not come off in Game Two.

    I expect we’ll see more of the same tonight, with some of the changes maybe even warranted. Kyle Lohse starts for St Louis and he has failed to impress in the postseason, both this year and in his career. With the smaller dimensions in Texas it may be a long night for the Cardinals staff. Matt Harrison starts for Texas and it’s a golden opportunity for them to take a 2-1 lead in the series. Home field advantage looks like it will play a very big role in the series, and the Cardinals lapse on Thursday night could prove very costly.

    , , , ,

  • Blue v Black

    Tomorrow morning at 03.00 CDT/09.00 BST is the fourth ODI between India and England. I’m hoping for an England fightback (and some changes to the XI) but I’m not optimistic. I’ll be missing the first part of the match because it is conveniently at the same time as the final of the Rugby World Cup. (Actually it is quite convenient because I probably wouldn’t get up just to see England play like shite again.)

    New Zealand play France in a match that the All Blacks ought to win because they are the better side and ought to lose because they have a World Cup hoodoo against France. Though actually it’s probably fairer to just say that New Zealand have a World Cup hoodoo; against France they have actually won three and lost two. The problem for the All Blacks is that those two losses have both been in knockout matches, whilst of their three victories only one has been in a knockout match (the 1987 final). The other two were in the 2003 third place playoff (or Bronze Final as they’re calling it now) and in the group stage of this World Cup.

    France have had their much publicised mutiny in the ranks, but are riding on a wave of confidence. They’ve pulled off two upsets in the knockout stages already and they clearly feel that they can pull off another. They will certainly have to play better than they did against Wales, however and will be unlikely to be aided by dodgy refereeing. By comparison, the All Blacks looked a bit fraught in the first half against Argentina, but quite comfortable since then. They have coped well with the loss of Dan Carter and look strong favourites. But then, when have New Zealand ever not looked strong favourites? (In rugby, I mean.) Despite being consistently the best side they have not won since the opening tournament. And, going off the media reports, the side and their fans actually seem to have less confidence than Les Bleus. Perhaps that’s a good thing for them. Their could be accused of overconfidence in their previous losses.

    My prediction: France 9-22 New Zealand.

    , , ,

  • Catches win matches

    Pakistan ought to have won the first test against Sri Lanka. The match was drawn despite the fact that Sri Lanka were bowled out for 197 in the first innings and it never rained. Sri Lanka fought very well in the second innings, Kumar Sangakkara scored a brilliant double ton, but Pakistan did not allow themselves enough time to force a result. Perhaps they had watched the Cardiff test and assumed that Sri Lanka would roll over again. Whatever the reason, Pakistan didn’t make much of an effort to kick on in their first innings. The only batsman who looked like he was batting for a declaration was Misbah-ul-Haq who scored a quick 46 before being unfairly given out. That dismissal made it 436-4, but the new batsman, Asad Shafiq proceeded to crawl to 26 off of 94 deliveries! To cap his disaster of an innings he ran out his partner, the double centurion Taufeeq Umar. It was a dreadful innings, especially in the circumstance. When Umar Gul was out for a duck it brought the declaration on 511-6. Pakistan had scored at less than three an over. Although Shafiq was the worst culprit, both Azhar Ali and Younis Khan had strike rates of only 35.

    This left Pakistan just over two days to bowl out Sri Lanka with a lead of 314. They still ought to have done this, although the conditions favoured the batsman. They got one wicket before close on the third day; a fortunate one as Tony Hill unfairly gave Paranavitana out LBW first ball. They took only four wickets on day four however and dropped five catches. They put down another on the last day, though by that time Sangakkara and Prasanna Jayawardene had already steered Sri Lanka to safety. Sangakkara’s 211 will have been particularly galling; he was reprieved multiple times.

    I’ll be interested to see how Pakistan go from here. The next test is on Wednesday in Dubai and the conditions are unlikely to improve. They gambled a bit by playing Junaid Khan in this test ahead of Wahab Riaz, but he very much justified his place and was arguably Pakistan’s best bowler in the match. (Umar Gul is the other possibility.) I doubt Pakistan will make any changes, they played well overall, but they need to improve their fielding.

    , , ,

  • England can relax now

    Yesterday England failed to defend 298 in a 50-over ODI. It means they trail 0-3 in the five match series and have lost 13 of their last 15 matches against India in India. The pitch was pretty good and India are a good side, but England ought to have won. They were anchored by Jonathan Trott’s 98 off 116 balls and supported by Samit Patel, who scored 70 off 43 balls. (Patel also had an good match with the ball, taking 0-50 off his ten overs and winning a motorbike for his efforts.) The usual furore over Jonathan Trott erupted again with some thinking that a strike rate just under 85 is too slow for an ODI. This is nonsense, about which I blogged at the time. The real blame belongs to England’s bowlers and fielding.

    Finn bowled well taking the new ball, but Bresnan and Dernbach were charged with bowling at the death and they had absolute shockers. Indeed, they’ve had a very poor series. Bresnan has taken 4-169 at 6.94 an over and Dernbach has taken 1-168 at 6.54 an over. As the strike leader and primary death bowler they have to do better than that. They had an indefensible total in the second ODI, but lost their grip on the match late in the innings in the first and third. India scored 300 both times, but shouldn’t have either time. The bowlers weren’t helped by the fielding, which was lacklustre at best. England allowed singles where there should have been dot balls and twos where there should have been singles, not to mention the occasional grotesque misfield for four. Kieswetter had a particularly bad match; he dropped two chances and then failed to effect what should have been an easy run out in the penultimate over.

    It was this over that took the match away from England. Despite a general lack of discipline in the field and lack of incisiveness in the bowling, India needed thirty off the final three overs. Knife edge stuff, but England had taken wickets in the 38th, 39th and 42nd overs and steadily forced the required run rate up to something defensible. India had a good 48th over against Finn (who was England’s best bowler in the match) to get the equation down to 17 off the last 12 balls. Then the wheels fell off. Jadeja ought to have been run out off the first ball of the 49th over as he tried for a suicidal second run, but Kieswetter tread on the stumps and was unable to correctly put down the wicket. The wicket would have made England clear favourites. Dernbach’s radar was off, as it had been throughout the match, and he went on to bowl a wide and then a no-ball on height. By the time the over finally finished India needed just seven to win and Bresnan had no hope in the final over. (Not that he bothered to make it close.)

    I say England can relax now because the last two matches of the series will be dead rubbers, giving them a chance to ring some changes. (They named an unchanged side in the first three.) The most obvious change is to bring in Ian Bell. I, and others, have been calling for it since the first match. I think he’ll come in for Kieswetter, who has done himself few favours in this series. Borthwick may also come into the side, though if so he would probably replace Patel and Patel has done very well in the last two matches after a poor start to the tour. He may instead come in for Bopara who hasn’t done much so far. I definitely expect Dernbach will miss out after having a very poor series. His replacement would either be Graham Onions or Stuart Meaker; probably Meaker since he was in the original party whilst Onions is a replacement for Chris Woakes. There are two matches left; time enough for each to get a game, but I’d actually like to see them both play and Bresnan miss out. This would be an ambitious move by Flower which would send a firm message to the under-performing bowlers. With Anderson and Broad both likely to return for the next ODI series it will make for good competition for places.

    , ,

  • There’s pitching after all!

    Surely it wasn’t ridiculous to expect a high scoring World Series. Carpenter, Garcia, Wilson and Lewis combined for an ERA of 6.60 during the ALCS and NLCS. During that time, the hitters for the Cardinals and Rangers averaged 6.83 runs per nine innings. So I thought it would be a fairly high scoring series. But now Game Two is almost over and the Cardinals lead 1-0 after winning the first game 3-2. It still could become a high scoring series, the Rangers have a tiny ballpark and they’ll have their crutch Designated Hitter back for that leg, but the first two games have not at all been what I expected.

    But the pitchers for both sides deserve credit. There is a saying that hitting wins games but pitching wins championships. This doesn’t make sense, of course, but the first sentence is supposed to be thrown out. And saying that pitching wins championships is usually correct, but the pitching for the Cardinals and Rangers has not been anything about which to write home. The top two in each rotation all did reasonably well in the regular season but were not the best in their leagues by any stretch. Previously in the playoffs only Chris Carpenter had done anything of note, the brilliant complete game shutout in Game Five of the NLDS. I’m not sure why the pitchers have suddenly come to the party but hopefully they’ll continue. Pitchers’ duels are so much more exciting than slugging contests.

    , ,

  • A walk or a Trott?

    Jonathan Trott splits opinion more than most cricketers and indeed more than most sportsmen. This is particularly true in the ODIs, where he is either a brilliant accumulator of runs or a limpet clogging up the innings. Today he has scored 98 not out off 116 balls. He could have been run out very early after a huge mix-up with KP but the Indian’s fielding was awry. (Which was surprising in that they’ve been quite sharp in this series but pretty familiar for anyone who watched them in England.) His strike rate in this innings was pretty close to his career average and 98 runs in any match is not something at which to be sniffed. But the impression of scoring slowly still remains.

    This is, I am convinced, harsh. England scored 298-4 in fifty overs, just a hair shy of a run a ball. Trott was not far off this rate, but when compared to KP’s 64 off 61 balls or Patel’s unbeaten 70 off 43 it certainly looks slow. But without Trott sticking around and keeping the scoreboard ticking over those innings may not have been possible. Bopara never looked set and if Patel had to contend with that at the other end he may not have been able to get himself going. Yes, Trott could have kicked on more, but that isn’t how he plays. When he’s got out cheaply England have collapsed. It’s important to have people like Kieswetter, Pietersen and Bairstow who can score at better than a run a ball, but it needs a Cook or a Trott to hold up the other end. You need to score runs to win any cricket match. Trott has been one of the few batsmen to consistently do this in ODIs and he ought to be recognised as one of England’s best ODI batsmen.

    , , ,

  • India’s loss is baseball’s gain

    I have wanted to see HotSpot in baseball for some time. Admittedly this was without a detailed plan of how the manufacturer would accomplish this, just a desire to see it. It could even clarify contentious hit by pitch calls. Now, courtesy of the pig-headedness of the BCCI I have got my wish. In the top of the fifth of Game One of the World Series Fox Sports showed the batsman fouling the ball off his foot in infrared. It was truly a glorious sight. Well, that’s not really true, but it was a cool sight. (And slightly odd, since I’m used to seeing it in a very different context.)

    It also provided a lovely reminder of how mind-blowingly stupid Tim McCarver is. Joe Buck, after making a stupid TSA joke did actually explain that it was an infrared camera borrowed from their cricket coverage. (I had actually forgot that Fox does the cricket in Oz too.) This prompted Tim McCarver to proclaim that he had no idea how it worked. It’s hard to be sure, but I think he is unaware that friction causes heat. Either that, or he just likes talking about how ignorant he is. I’ve spent a lot of time during the postseason trying to decide if the various TBS commentators are worse than Joe Buck and Tim McCarver. I still suspect they are, but Tim is making it close.

    , , , ,

  • This, that and the other

    Some short thoughts on the various matches I’ve been watching.

    South Africa v Australia: First ODI
    As I type this South Africa are 84-6 after sixteen overs needing 223 to win off 29 overs. Australia were marginally on top at the interval and Cummins put them firmly on top with two wickets in the eighth over. They haven’t looked back since. The rain was disappointing but Duckworth-Lewis gave a fair target. It’s also been really nice to see the lack of adverts on the ground. There is a plain rope around the ground and the bowlers run ups are marked with CSA’s facebook and twitter sites. Hopefully in the second ODI they will find a way to project their status updates and tweets on to the pitch. I know the technology exists.

    Pakistan v Sri Lanka: First Test
    Pakistan are in absolute control of this match after losing only one wicket on the second day. Sri Lanka bowled loosely at the start and it doesn’t look like they ever really recovered. (Though I could be wrong, I went to bed after about an hour. In my defence it was 02.00 in my time zone.) We saw in England that Sri Lanka no longer have any bowlers of note. Unless they can find someone to do what Stuart Broad did at Trent Bridge last summer it’s just a matter of hoping that they can hold on for a draw. Unfortunately for them, I believe it rains slightly less in the UAE than it does in England.

    Marsielle v Arsenal
    I have no idea how this match is going because Fox prefer to show matches between continental sides about whom I care little. (Not so little that I’m not watching between overs, mind.) So I get to watch Barcelona play Czech champions Viktoria instead. Yesterday I got to watch Inter Milan play Lille instead of either match involving a Manchester based side. Even more infuriatingly the Arsenal match is being shown on a delay, so they refused to even tell me the halftime score or show highlights. I would, of course, just watch the match later, except they’re showing it at the same time as the World Series. And it’s not like they don’t know. It’s the same broadcaster. They had an advert for the World Series at halftime. It’s times like this that I’m kind of glad that Liverpool did not make Europe, because if I’d had to miss the Reds in favour of some continental side I would be be very cross instead of just mildly irritated.

    Rangers v Cardinals: Game One
    Both sides have had very good offensive performances and won their respective Championship Series in six games. They scored a lot of their runs at opposite ends of their matches though, with St Louis consistently jumping out in front early and the Rangers blowing games open with late home runs. The big story for their Cardinals has been their bullpen performing brilliantly after some shaky starting pitching. They might have some trouble getting away with that against the powerful Rangers offence however. The Cardinals have home field advantage which may be important as the Rangers will definitely fancy their chances in their very small park. (They were 4-1 at home in the first two rounds.) I am tipping the Rangers to win, as unless the Cardinals’ starters improve they will find themselves in big holes early on.

    , ,
    , , , , , ,